Chehalis, QIN Numbers, Salmon netted

10/06/2021

QIN numbers for 1st Schedule days, 9/26---29

Chinook------995

Chum--------- 21

Coho---------2276

from WDFW web site........Someone in Region 6 is working, thanks for posting numbers.

Oh, they are past the Model numbers, now what?????

Keep on fishing. The agreements are for a fixed schedule, regardless of catch. Since they are fishing at a rate, not a number, they will still achieve escapement goal as they will only take x%, regardless of run size. Has worked perfectly in the past, so why not now?

Th vast majority of the “A” run coho already blew up the satsop. Probably in the realm of 5,000-10,000 fish. I watched hundreds of fish moving the week before it opened every couple hours for 5 days. They made for great fun while trout fishing. 😉

Wait minute? Actually in the past fixed fish numbers were the norm back in the 70's & 80's, based on run predictions. I remember on the Puyallup the 1983-84 winter Steelhead run forecast was a fixed number the tribes were allocated and a huge run showed up as well around the state, and the tribe achieved there quota number the first 3 weeks of Dec. Then the then WDG forced them to pull out having met the quota. The run continued to build all season and the tribes were out which produced a state leading sports catch. I guess they wised up and went to 50% of days of a season vs 50% of a forecasted quota number. Funny how the tide has turned. All of our salt sport fisheries are based on forecasted quota numbers instead of 50% of the season. Sucks balls if you ask me!

Sometime in the early-mid 80s WDG switched to HR-based fisheries. They did not believe they could update the runs and they further believed that fisheries occurred at fixed rates. If that was true, then regardless of run size the tribes took a fixed percentage of the run and the sporties took theirs. The rest was the escapement which was supposed to be always at or above goal.

Salmon were managed differently for a couple reasons. First were the "prior interceptions" that included sport, troll, C&S, and net dropout. These were based on the forecast, was was how the rec fisheries were initially scheduled. The commercial net fisheries were managed based on weekly in-season updates. With each update, the Priors were also updated and "new" 50:50 allocations set. Then, people fished to the number. Commercial net catch for all was reported to a centralized computer system with catch more than 95% complete within three days of the fishery.

I don't know how it is done toady other than there are few updates and catch data is not nearly as up-to-date. But we do know that the 50:50 sharing has been abandoned.

How can the 50-50 sharing be abandoned when that's the law of the Bolt Decision? And if so, why are we not going to court to force the 50-50?

The Court mandated 50:50 but allows the parties (State and Tribes) to agree to something else. The Tribes have shown, as in the South Sound Chinook case, that they will go to court if they aren't getting their 50%. But, from what I understand, the State believes that it is in their best interest to agree to the Tribes exceeding 50%. Have to ask them, and then hope they give a transparent and complete answer.

10/12/2021

QIN Numbers, Chehalis, for 2nd Week....10/ 3 - 5

Chinook---------409

Chum------------112

Coho.........,2,614



Totals for 2 Netting Weeks..Chehalis

Chinook......... 1407

Chum............ 134

Coho............. 4915

and thats just the ones that got counted!

CPUE pretty high for kings

""But, from what I understand, the State believes that it is in their best interest to agree to the Tribes exceeding 50%.""

From Pat Patillo, who has a BS from UW School of Fisheries, and 36 years at WDFW and was the Statewide Salmon Fishery Manager (1991-2000) and Policy Lead for Inter-jurisdictional Fisheries Management (2000-2009), ...from his sworn Declaration under punishment of perjury in District Court Case C70-9213:

"The harvest imbalance is known and has occurred consistently for years. ... Based on the 2020 seasons approved by WDFW, the treaty tribes, and NMFS, ... the forecasted catch of Puget Sound Chinook salmon was 111,615 for the treaty tribes and 69,622 for the non-treaty fishers." ...which is 38% of the harvestable total.
Then Patillo swears the WDFW agreed to non-treaty Puget Sound Chinook harvest percent of :
42% in 2019
43% in 2018
41% in 2017, thus providing proof that "it is known and has occurred consistently for years."

Patillo: "For the years 2017 through 2020, it is estimated ...that non-treaty fisheries harvested 124,696 less Puget SOund Chinook than did the treaty fishers."

Now, you can't blame the tribe for harvesting what was agreed to. So, who is at fault for not retaining our legal share of 50% per Boldt?

(reference https://www.goskagit.com/news/fishing-gr...ce3070a003.html

and

US DIstrict Court Western District
USA v. State of Washington
Case # C70-9213

In a discussion of Hoh steelhead the question was asked of Phil Anderson, before he was director, as to why the NI side isn't fish in the last half of April as there were fish available in the NI share. The answer was "we got the fisheries we wanted". He would not define what those fisheries were or who "we" was. These NOF agreements are, by nature, "agreed to". WDFW is satisfied.

What we need to know is why they are satisfied.

Phil showed the bias of fisheries.

Harvest the foodfish, gamefish be damned.

It was a two way street. The Game side ignored salmon.

Tribes may be ahead on salmon, but pretty certain the state is ahead on the shellfish side, esp out here on the coast. Crab and razor clams come quickly to mind.

The sharing in Boldt covers at least salmon, steelhead, marine fish, halibut, clams, and crab. As Doc notes, the QIN have given some of their razor clams to the state so a fishery could be opened.

I am removed of Phil Anderson's "We got the fishery we wanted" response as to why a particular steelhead fishery did not go for the NI share. What we, as stakeholders and license buyers need to know is why there are these deviations.

May need to go back to Ronnie's "Trust, but verify" mantra.

10/21/2021

QIN numbers for Week 42, 10/10 - 12

Chinook ------------ ------- 270

Chum ----------------------- 243

Coho ----------------------- 3,807


TOTAL FOR THE 3 Weeks

Chinook --------------------- 1,677

Chum --------------------- 377

Coho --------------------- 8,722

Sure would like to know Hatchery vs. Wild.


All my fishing has been above South Montesano, so its only legal to keep hatchery Adult Coho. I fish spoons, only 1 hatchery fish in my boat, LOTS of wild fish released.

most recent week
kings 270
chum 243
coho 3807

3 week total is correct

Talking last set only using this years modeled harvest, Coho massively over performed. Chinook were just opposite and catch was well below anticipated. The opposite of Chinook and Coho coming early with the rain Chum are an absolute no show which means they are late as the numbers cannot get that way.

Also the total numbers I have modeled are off due to this years season being a one week set back. That said the Nations Coho numbers are about 1300 above estimate. Chinook 235 is 200 and change over, and Chum 377 is way below 5683 anticipated harvest.

So are the fish being released by sportsmen really wild fish? I've been catching a lot of fish with small (1/2) adipose and deformed dorsal fins. To me those are misclipped hatchery fish. Not many at all true hatchery fish to kill above Fuller.

Doubt if they are miss clipped as after handling many thousands of them a bad clip is deformed. To be honest a bad clip is very easy to see and distinctive.

I know what a wild adipose fin looks like and these are defiantly not "wild" adipose fins. And what about the deformed dorsal?

no idea but Bingham used to do a blind cwt that is a hatchery fish with CWT but not clipped. it is a way to see if the math tracks with clipped fish. not sure if they still do it.

CWT???

coded wire tag / it is a tiny wire with a numerical on it that is imbedded in the fishes nose so to speak when they are fry.

Another possibility is the volunteers that use remote site incubators ( RSI ) which get eggs and hatch them and release the fry. They use bio rings rather than gravel and but the bio rings are smooth. Still to much flow will make them move around . These fry are not marked before release.

One final thought is that there is a difference between a wild ad fin and hatchery. Bit of an old wives tale for normal timed Coho. Now the late timed wild Coho do go against that with a rather large ad fin but that tends to be proportional to size and predominantly West Fork & Middle Fork Satsop fish that return mid Dec through Jan.

I was under the impression that unclipped hatchery fish with a CWT are part of what is called the "double index tag group" and that most hatchery stocks, or maybe management areas had this going on with a static 5% of the smolt release group. It is done for the reasons as said above, to better the odds of getting data back. I wager that 5% is more than the missclip rate for smolts.

Back in the 80s/90s WDF tried to see if hatchery Chinook would establish a "wild" run in the Deschutes. Unmarked fish did come back but the number was such that it could have been "drops" or wild fish.

Cowboys quick-reporting past 3 days:
4000 chum dominated the catch with about ~4 chum for every coho. Coupla kings retained.